Developing, refining and submitting a grant proposal 5 th June 2013

1. University of Glamorgan Developing, refining and submitting a grant proposal 5th June 2013

2. Developing, refining and submitting a grant proposal • Session 1 - Refining your proposal • Session 2 - Finance and resources • Session 3 - Submitting the document • Session 4 - Glamorgan’s approval process • Session 5 - What happens next? • Session 6 - Further support and information

3. Session 1 : Refining your proposal

4. Impact • More easy to define for some projects; but research councils know this • Can be up to 20 years • RCUK impact: - Fostering global economic performance, and specifically the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom; - Increasing the effectiveness of public services and policy, and - Enhancing quality of life, health and creative output.

5. Potential beneficiaries • Are there potential beneficiaries within the private sector? • Is there anyone, including policy-makers, within international, national, local or devolved government and government agencies who would benefit from the research? • Are there potential beneficiaries within the public sector, third sector or any others (e.g. museums, galleries, charities)? • Would the research be of interest to professional or practitioner groups (such as the legal profession, architects, planners, archivists, designers, creative and performing artists)? • Are there any beneficiaries within the wider public?

7. Writing about impact • Impact Summary (Who, in what way) • Pathways to impact (How- ‘dissemination plan’) • Example of how to deal with impact: http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/Funding-Opportunities/Documents/ImpactFAQ.pdf

8. Peer review • Who can help to improve the application? • What disciplines does it cover? Are there other perspectives on how it will be reviewed? • How can you defuse any potential opposition? What are the elements that reviewers may question?

9. Improving your proposal • Clarity - of expression and ideas

10. Key words : ‘persuasive structures’ for impact • Rule of three- e.g. “the project will deliver a solution that is affordable, efficient and effective” • Use key phrases- innovative, cutting edge, novel, transferable, high impact, achievable....... • Snappy titles and acronyms- e.g WISERD, REACT

11. Workshop: What are some good/bad phrases to use?

12. Yes Minister- The Right to Know Sir Humphrey: There are four words you have to work into a proposal if you want a Minister to accept it.Sir Frank: Quick, simple, popular, cheap. And equally there are four words to be included in a proposal if you want it thrown out.Sir Humphrey: Complicated, lengthy, expensive, controversial. And if you want to be really sure that the Minister doesn't accept it you must say the decision is courageous.Bernard: And that's worse than controversial?Sir Humphrey: (laughs) Controversial only means this will lose you votes, courageous means this will lose you the election.

13. The fine detail • Word counts • Spelling and grammar • Borders and font sizes • Multiple fields- extra pieces of information you may not realise at the start. • Showing that you care about the proposal is important.

14. Session 2 - finance and resources

15. Finances and resources • Full Economic Costing • Achieving the best level of funding- RCUK 80% FEC • Estates and indirect costs • Justification for Resources- show value for money; impact costs; well thought out. • Investigators- justify time and expertise, not money. • Other elements- justify cost (e.g. camera- prices)

16. Costings: what to ask for • Start date and total duration of project • Your time (in % or hours, i.e. 20%= 1 day per week) • Time of any co-investigators to be employed on the project • Any research fellows/assistants to be employed (often postdoctoral). Grade E (recent post-doc, probably first job) Grade F (e.g. 5 years postdoc experience) or Grade G (v. experienced- equivalent to senior lecturer level) • Any costs for technical support in the faculty (as a % of time) or any admin costs (as full time or a % of time) • Equipment cost estimates (IT should normally only be if it’s a specific bit of equipment that wouldn’t normally be provided at the University) • Any travel or subsistence costs that are likely to be required (eg for research meetings, steering group meetings, participants) • Impact costs- to include things like workshops, seminars, conferences etc • Recruitment costs (eg £2000 cost for national advertising, if fundable) • Any other costs you can think of!

17. Session 3: Submitting the document

18. Electronic forms • Key forms- summary, impact summary, resources, appendices • Je-S Joint Electronic Submission- used by RCUK (AHRC, EPSRC etc) • https://je-s.rcuk.ac.uk • Register via website- validated by Research Office • Register partners as early as possible!

19. Session 4 : Glamorgan’s approval process

20. Institutional approval • EFAS-External Funding Application System https://efas.glam.ac.uk:8443/ • Part A and Part B • Signatures and approvals • Proposal submission through Je-S, e-Grants • Approval from other partners

22. Session 5: What happens next?

23. What next- review and panels • Peer review and grading process (research councils) • PI response- how it works and guidance • Panel- proposals are ranked • How many are funded? – success rates • http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Efficiency/Pages/Successrates.aspx

24. Session 6: Further support and information

25. Support • Research office • CSO • European Office

26. What can RO support? • Peer review • Workshops/sandpits • Help with writing aspects of proposals including impact, justification of resources • Institutional approval – EFAS • ‘Matching’ service

27. Other resources • Write a winning funding bid- NCVO knowhow (focuses on charitable funding) • http://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/write-a-winning-funding-bid